Faizan Pasha @ Mohammed Faizan vs The State Of Karnataka
2024 Latest Caselaw 25291 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Faizan Pasha @ Mohammed Faizan vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 October, 2024

Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar

Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar

                                                 -1-
                                                              NC: 2024:KHC:42819
                                                         CRL.A No. 1294 of 2024




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

                                               BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1294 OF 2024
                      BETWEEN:

                            FAIZAN PASHA @ MOHAMMED FAIZAN
                            S/O KHAJA NAYAZ PASHA
                            AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
                            R/AT SIDDARTHANAGARA,
                            SHIDLAGHATTA TOWN
                            CHIKKABALALPURA -562 101.
                                                                     APPELLANT
                      (BY SRI. KALYAN R., ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                            REP BY SHIDLAGHATTA POLICE STATION
                            CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
                            REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                            HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                            AT BANGALORE 01
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA       2.    SRI SHIVAPPA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH              S/O MUNIYAPPA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                            AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                            R/AT WARD NO.8, SIDDARTHANAGARA
                            SHIDLAGHATTA TOWN,
                            CHIKKABALLAPURA -562 101.
                                                                 ...RESPONDENTS

                      (BY SRI. A. VENKATA SATHYANARAYANA, HCGP FOR R-1
                          SMT. G. M SUMITHRA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

                           THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT,
                      2015 PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED
                                 -2-
                                             NC: 2024:KHC:42819
                                         CRL.A No. 1294 of 2024




TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED DATED 23.05.2024 PASSED BY
THE 1ST ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
CHIKKABALLPURA IN CRL.MISC.NO.328/2024 AND TO GRANT
ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE APPELLANT IN THE EVENT OF
ARREST IN THE CR.NO.102/2023 P/U/S 323, 324, 504, 506
R/W 34 AND U/S 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF SC AND ST (POA)
AMENDMENT ACT, 2015 AND U/S 92 OF THE PERSON WITH
DISABILITY (EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES, PROTECTION OF RIGHTS
AND FULL PARTICIPATION) ACT, 1994 AND ETC,.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:      HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR


                     ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by accused No.1 praying to set

aside the order dated 23.05.2024 passed in

Crl.Misc.No.328/2024 by the I Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur, whereunder anticipatory

bail petition of this appellant -accused No.1 sought in

respect of crime No.102/2023 of Shidlghatta Town Police

Station for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324,

504, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code

(hereinafter referred to as "IPC" for brevity), Sections

3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 (Hereinafter referred to as "SC

NC: 2024:KHC:42819

and ST Act" for brevity) and Section 92 of the Person with

Disability (Equal opportunities, Protection of Rights and full

Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as

"Disability Act" for brevity), came to be rejected.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant -

accused No.1, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and

learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent

No.1-State.

3. Respondent No.2 has filed a complaint stating

that he was moving in motor cycle along with one Mani on

the road and he asked accused No.1 to remove the vehicle

parking on the road. Accused No.1 who is appellant herein

has removed the vehicle parked on the road and when

respondent No.2 and Mani proceeded further, it is alleged

that the appellant -accused No.1 has abused them by

touching their caste. At that time, accused Nos.2 to 4

came their, assaulted respondent No.2 and caused simple

injuries. The said complaint has been registered in Crime

No.102/2023 of Shidlghatta Town Police Station for

NC: 2024:KHC:42819

offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506

read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) and

3(1)(s) of the SC and ST Act. The police after

investigation have filed charge sheet against the appellant

-accused No.1 and other accused for offence punishable

under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of

IPC, Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC and ST Act and

Section 92 of the Disability Act. The appellant -accused

No.1 apprehending his arrest has filed petition seeking

anticipatory bail and same came to be rejected by the

impugned order, which is challenged in this appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant -accused

No.1 would contend that accused Nos.2 to 4 who are

similarly placed to that this appellant -accused No.1 have

been granted anticipatory bail. Therefore, this appellant -

accused No.1 is also entitled to grant of anticipatory bail

on the ground of parity. He further submits that there is

no mention in the complaint that the appellant -accused

No.1 was knowing respondent No.2 and that he belongs to

NC: 2024:KHC:42819

scheduled caste. Therefore, the allegation of appellant -

accused No.1 abusing respondent No.2 is false. He further

submits that as averments of the complaint so far as

abusing respondent No.2 touching his caste is false and

therefore, the offence under Section 3 of the SC and SC

Act is not attracted and also the bar under Section 18 of

the SC and ST Act is also not attracted. Other offences

alleged against appellant -accused No.1 are not

punishable with death or imprisonment for life. With this,

he prays to allow the appeal and grant anticipatory bail to

the appellant -accused No.1.

5. Learned High Court Government Pleader for

respondent No.1 would contend that charge sheet

materials indicate that this appellant -accused No.1 and

other accused assaulted respondent No.2 who is handicap

and dragged him and committed offences alleged against

them. The appellant -accused No.1 has abused

respondent No.2 by touching his caste and in view of the

same, bar under Section 18 of the SC and ST is attracted.

NC: 2024:KHC:42819

Therefore, learned Session Judge has rightly rejected his

anticipatory bail petition of this appellant -accused No.1.

With this, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would

contend that respondent No.2 is handicap person, he has

been abused and assaulted by this appellant -accused

No.1 and other accused. The appellant -accused No.1 has

abused him by touching his caste. Considering, the said

aspect, learned Session Judge has rightly rejected his

anticipatory bail petition of this appellant -accused No.1.

With this, she prays for dismissal of the appeal.

7. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has

perused the impugned order and other charge sheet

materials placed on record.

8. On perusal of the averments of the complaint

there is no mention that respondent No.2 and appellant -

accused No.1 are known to each other and the appellant -

accused No.1 is knowing caste of respondent No.2. The

alleged incident has taken placed with regard to parking of

NC: 2024:KHC:42819

vehicle by the accused No.1 on the road and respondent

No.2 asked him to remove the vehicle parked on the road.

As there is no averment in the complaint that the

complainant -respondent No.2 and appellant -accused

No.1 are known to each other and the appellant -accused

No.1 is aware of caste respondent No.2. The averments

that appellant -accused No.1 abusing respondent No.2

appears to be not true. Therefore, at this stage it cannot

be said that there is case which attracts offence

punishable under Section 3 of the SC and ST Act.

Therefore, the bar under Section 18 is not attracted. Other

offences alleged against this appellant -accused No.1 are

not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life.

Accused Nos.2 to 4 have been granted anticipatory bail by

the Sessions Court. In view of the above, the appellant -

accused No.1 has made out grounds for setting aside the

impugned order and grant of anticipatory bail.

In the result, the following

NC: 2024:KHC:42819

ORDER

The appeal is allowed.

The impugned order dated 23.05.2024 passed in

Crl.Misc.No.328/2024 by the I Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur is set aside. Consequently,

anticipatory bail petition of this appellant -accused No.1 is

allowed and he is ordered to be released on bail in crime

No.102/2023 of Shidlghatta Town Police Station Police

Station in event of his arrest subject to the following

conditions:

i. The appellant - accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer.

        ii.   The    appellant      -   accused      shall
              voluntarily     appear       before     the
              Investigating         Officer/Jurisdictional

Court within fifteen days from today.

NC: 2024:KHC:42819

iii. The appellant - accused shall not threaten complainant and prosecution witnesses.

         iv.    The      appellant     -     accused        shall
                cooperate      with        Police      in    the
                Investigation.

         v.     The appellant - accused shall attend

the Court on all dates of hearing unless exempted and cooperate in speedy disposal of the case.

Sd/-

(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

DSP